Original and Authentic, an attempt at defining a standard.

Share:

I think we can take a leaf from vintage cars which usually goes something along the following:

Original - As it left the factory - with regards to both components AND appearance. Having a car with original paint and panels on it isn't very good if all those "original" panels are rusted out. As with watches, there is a bit of room hear for interpretation that is up to the beholder - if you as the viewer / consumer are happy to call something original even though it has a hefty dose of patina, then that is up to you.

Concours - The car may not be in the original condition as it left the factory, but may have been lovingly restored with original manufacturer components, to a condition that presents it in the same condition as a car that just rolled off the production line - in this instance, the car is to be considered "Authentic", but not original. In this example, the object should not only contain authentic manufacturer components, but should present in the condition that it left the factory.

Then we can have authentic which covers objects which have been restored / overhauled with authentic components but no longer present like they did from the factory.

This definition seems to be hard to verify:When IWC refreshes the case (not polishing) it looks "factory original"as they know, how if was originally done.Also when in the past the watch got a new dial, you will declar it as factory original, as you cannot check if the dial was changed in the past or not.

I keep it as just described: Original = all parts from factory.If you like bright a new dial, or prefer an old "factory original" (no so bright) should not matter.

A good point has been made. There is the need to recognize the watch of the collector who will never wear it (strap/bracelet with no signs of having been used), keep all the boxes and papers signed and stamped by the AD, and will never send it to the wacthmaker for any reason. As Tony said, this is New Old Stock, and should be above factory original (or any other designation that better describes that condition).

I used to think it was clever to confuse comedy with tragedy. Now I wish I could distinguish them. John le Carré

what Tony proposes makes a "should be" vs. "is" comparison necessary. Do we really know the "should be"-condition and are we able to establish a difference? If for example the balance staff once was broken and has been replaced with OEM parts by a knowledgeable watchmaker: Who is able to establish that? And who does know, whether the dial on a pocket watch is all original when the sales records comprise no entry regarding the dial?

And what is concerning Jones watches and watches in Cress Arrow cases, which all left Schaffhausen without case and were cased in the US?

I'm pretty sure any definition defining a "point" rather than a "range" will end up in nothing. Besides that: Condition is a major topic as well. So some kind of score card would be helpful. Regarding originality such score card could award 5 points to a dial established factory original and not changed, 4 points for dial, which is not established factory original, but is an OEM part, fits technicalwise and in terms of stylee etc. and complies with the knowledge we have about that type of watch, and so on.

Probably no watch will be credited the maximum No. of points because with most parts you can establish, if they are correct, but not wether they have been replaced.

Having the scores you can convert them into marks as it was at school.

I think it is important to separate Originality and Autheticity from Condition. There is already a good scale for condition that seems to be accepted by the majority of collectors and dealers, even if inflated by some.

I used to think it was clever to confuse comedy with tragedy. Now I wish I could distinguish them. John le Carré

Hello everyone,I have an IWC Automatic bought in the spring of 1972. According to DateYour IWC, it was probably manufactured in 1967. I have used it since I bought it. When needed the watch has been serviced by an excellent watchmaker – to my knowledge there was no AD where I live for many years. In case service parts were needed he got them from contacts in the business. There is no record of parts replaced during these 40 years.2012 the watch was in a rather bad condition and was sent to IWC for spa treatment. It returned in mint condition with one exception: The original dial was nor replaced. It has to minor defects and the cost of a new one would have been about $ 800. The case was polished. IWC did not list the parts that had been replaced. So, I have a vintage IWC with no records of parts replaced and with the original dial. Having followed the discussion, I would like to know how this watch would be classified.

Hi Bo,This is a work in progress and it is far too early to start labeling specific watches. We may come up with something interesting, or not.If we do, this will only interest a limited number of vintage IWC collectors, and only as a guideline. I doubt IWC would adopt any criteria we agree upon, if we ever do.

I used to think it was clever to confuse comedy with tragedy. Now I wish I could distinguish them. John le Carré

Your watch is almost certainly an "authentic" or "genuine" IWC, in that it is very unlikely that it would have left the service department with other than correct parts.

For obvious reasons, though, it is not "original", as there have been parts replaced.

T. Koenig –

Without some kind of forensic analysis, the cost of which could never be justified for other than extraordinarily valuable watches, there will always be some room for questions about perfect originality. Crowns and crystals are often the most difficult to assess with confidence, but I doubt that movement parts other than screws and mainsprings were replaced with any regularity.

I would suggest that there are three steps that can be taken in order to reduce the likelihood of misrepresentation (or fraud): expert assessment (outsourced if necessary), establish a provenance (if possible), and assessment of the reputation of the seller (if the watch is on the market).

As Clepsydra has pointed out, condition is a totally separate issue, and, while worthy a discussion on its own, is better left out of this thread.

I find the idea of a point system to be reasonable in the context of condition ratings, but not in the context of this discussion. Again, there is already a long-standing, simple, and well understood set of terms that has served its purpose well over many decades.

New Old Stock (NOS)

Original (no parts replaced; may have been serviced)

Correct (genuine and appropriate replacement parts used)

Now, there are, of course, many liberties taken with language by watch dealers and sellers. I am not suggesting that the terms I have presented above are always used consistently or correctly. But, very much like condition claims, the more serious and reliable the seller, the more accurately such terms tend to be used.

New Old Stock (NOS)Original (no parts replaced; may have been serviced)Correct (genuine and appropriate replacement parts used)

I like these categories, but each one must be further detailed.

New Old Stock (NOS) - Never worn (strap/bracelet with no signs of use), with all the original boxes and papers signed and stamped by the AD.The term NOS is the most abused one, and must be the most rigourously defined.

Original - No parts replaced, nothing added or removed. May have been serviced. Never polished.Polishing removes material and may change the shape of the case, rendering not original in volume and shape. The problem here is that service includes replacing gaskets and sealants and frequently the cristal and the crown.

Correct - genuine and appropriate replacement parts used.Military watches (including the BOAC Mark 11) may have stamps/engravings made by the miitary service that acquired and used it.This is the category where most vintage IWCs will fall.

The Jones and the Cress Arrow cased in the USA with IWC movements are important IWC watches and must not fall through the classification cracks. It is unlikely we will find NOS ones, but it is possible that some may still be classified as Original, although many can be Correct.

I used to think it was clever to confuse comedy with tragedy. Now I wish I could distinguish them. John le Carré